Sunday, January 30, 2005

On 9/11/2001, President Bush saw that we needed to bring representative govenment to muslims in order to drain the fever swamps that spawned OBL, et al. Today saw a major victory in that struggle.

I work with a young guy who's in the "Bus Lied, People Died!" and "Where are the WMD?" camp. Call him a Sandbox Democrat, if you will; the sort of person who celebrated RWR's death, thinks Republicans eat puppies, and would like to see the President die an ugly, slow, disfiguring death. The sort of person who takes his cues from Barbara Boxer.

I guarantee you that if I remind him of this 20 years hence, it'll embarass him.

Friday, January 28, 2005

As long as he stands up and talks about exit strategies, the Ba'athist Dead-Enders and local Islamofascists have reason for hope and material with which to recruit suicide bombers. Resulting in more dead Americans.

I wish to God Kennedy would complete his self-pickling and fall, like a dead tick, off the American body politic.

If she's selected, it'll be another example of the Democratic party thinking that it can get away with picking a candidate who has just enough positives to get 50% + 1 vote. In Hillary's case, the choice would be doubly cynical, in that her left wing bona fides are well enough established that they all would know she's not serious about the "values" thing.

I think she'll be much easier to take on than Kerry. Kerry had almost no record. Twenty years in the Senate, and nothing to show for it. Hillary's got a record. From her graduation speech, to Watergate, through Arkansas, to the present, she's shown an inclination to Stalinism that constitutes a dirty-tricks, opposition research operative's wet dream.

On the other hand, she's not to be underestimated. She's certainly got copies of those 900 FBI files, and she'll use whats in them. Right there you've got the ability to manipulate much, if not all, of the Washington power elite. Were I t he Republican party, I'd find out who she's got the goods on, and build a candidate with no connection to any of them.

Bill's also a liability. Does America really want him back in the White House? And with no responsibility? Since leaving the White House he's added to his skirt-chasing reputation, which won't help her one little bit (this explains why PResident Bush has been asking Bill for help ). Were I Bill, I'd be asking for more Secret Service protection, lest I end up taking an unfortunate spill off my trailer park Presidential Library into the Arkansas River.

So, to recap, Hillary runs in 2008 after Bill has an unfortunate accident. She loses to a complete newcomer, despite guarded support from all sorts of Republican worthies. She remains in the Senate until she keels over. When she's buried, an entire generation of Arakansans come out of mourning.

If this speech means anything at all, then Bush's second term is going to be a blowout!

What could stop it? Well, Bill Frist wants to be President. If he has to ruin Bush's second term to get his first, he will. Senators are like that. The challenge for the President will be to use the power of the office in such a way that the Senate can't get in his way.

So, while I don't expect that we'll see a lot of Begala's "Stroke of the pen, law of the land" activity, I think this administration will depend as little as possible on the legialative branch.

Having grown up in Ireland, I've occasionally thought about retiring there. I've always dismissed it as a pipe-dream, as land prices have been going through the roof ever since Ireland really started taking advantage of the EU.

It's obvious to me that the EU can't hold. It looks like an attempt at a federal United States of Europe, but it's actually the French putting Europe back to where it was in about 1680. The Brits hate the French and the Irish; the Spanish hate the Portugese; everyone has contempt for the Italians; the Germans, well, let's face it, four words: "Land war in Europe." And all this love is returned with interest. The currency is up for whatever dodgy game the French think will help them get ahead. There's no common language. Rules and regulations are set by an unelected bureaucracy in Brussels. Inspectors General reports of fraud in EU administration are dealt with harshly, in that the IG gets fired. The Arabs are taking over. Meanwhile, no politician has the will to deal with reality.

I've no doubt that the EU will collapse, sooner rather than later, and when it does there will be dislocation like we saw in Germany in the 1930s. Afterwards, we'll see a number of looser federations. One will be centered on Germany and include Holland, the Scandanavian countries, and bits of Eastern Europe (the rest of Eastern Europe will fall into Russia's orbit.) Another will be centered on France, and include Belgium and the mediterranean countries. England will go it "alone," falling back on its commonwealth and the United States - the emerging anglosphere.

Ireland? Well, as usual, Ireland will be screwed (again). Culturally the Irish have more in common with France, but communications with the continent do involve crossing water. Historically, Ireland's an English colony and England is Ireland's biggest trading partner. So, simple geography dictates a mismatch between what the Irish want, and what they'll get.

Then there's Northern Ireland. Ireland wanted to join a federal United States of Europe in order to become wealthy and liberal enough to overcome protestant objections to reunion. Well, Ireland may have become quite liberal, but a collapse of the EU puts the wealth in doubt. It's in England's interest to keep Ireland weak and in its orbit, so Ireland will get little help there. In fact, the English may well reprise their historic role as Saxon troublemakers and bane of Celtic existence.

Ultimately, Europe will fall back into historical patterns, and Ireland will start to look like it was in the 1950s: divided, occasionally violent, poor, rural, agrarian, and a net exporter of people.

There's a piece of land near Achill that I might just go after. When the walls come tumbling down, that is.

Basically, it looks like the student wrote the paper, the Professor failed the student and made the remark, the student went public about the whole thing, and the Professor - caught with hand in cookie jar - is trying to get away by whining.

In Professor Joseph Woolcock we have the worst sort of tenured left-wing bully.

The college ought to cut its losses. Take a look at what happened at Cal Poly.

Oh, speaking of Dan Rather, it looks like Government makes a regular practice of paying journalists to be flacks.

So, here's the deal: Rather's got an axe he's grinding, while Williams is paid to back the Government line. Taken together, you begin to realize that you can no longer really trust anyone in the media.

So, here's the final report (pdf) on Gunga Dan and his attempt to bring down the President with a fake story.

Quick question: does anyone care any more? I mean, I see the bias in the mainstream media, and it's moved me on to other news sources. I don't mind bias, as such. I do mind bias that's cloaked in this holier-than-thou mantle called "objective journalism."

So, I'm not worried that Dan had a go at the President. I do mind that Dan's a complete hypocrite.

Today's AJC has a stiry wondering whether Americans give enough charity. The story notes that so far the Japanese Government has pledged $500 million for tsunami relief, as opposed to a relatively paltry $350 million from the U.S. Government.

Note to the AJC: it's the GOVERNMENT, stupid.

When the U.S. Government pledges $350 million, it's actually going to me, putting a gun to my head, and demanding I open my wallet. That's not charity. That's taking by force, and most of the time it's illegal.

In any event, the U.S. Government has pledged $350 million, in this instance. Over at amazon.com, individuals have freely given about $12 million. That's just at amazon.com. According to this survey, American private, free, philanthropy was something like $240 BILLION in 2003. I'll bet some of that found its way overseas.

As the article notes, last year's American Government "charity" was $18 billion, with Japan coming in second at about $9 billion.

No, this article isn't about American charitable giving, it's just the dead-head blue-staters at the AJC haveing another go at the President.